Powered 100% by natural gas, which, as a reminder, releases carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides.

> On Wednesday, Morris said that “one hundred percent of the power will be generated off the Ruby Pipeline,” while explaining the project to the county commissioners

How can burning that much natural gas to power it be worth the downstream health problems? The emissions from this sole power source at this scale is irresponsible. The idea is worse when you consider:

- Salt Lake City air already contains enough pollutants from the nearby oil refineries, mining, and cars

- Utah is building out a massive inland port nearby

- The Great Salt Lake is drying up, and expected to put toxic dust in the air, unless massive restoration efforts are undertaken

- Due to its shape, the Salt Lake Valley is a pit for poisonous air, exacerbated by "the inversion" weather patterns

Burning enough natural gas to outclass the entire state's power production is absolutely insane. They should be required, at a minimum, to utilize some amount of green energy for this monstrosity.

Would exhaust from site of the proposed power plant / data center flow to the Weber/Davis/Salt Lake Wasatch front areas that have the bad inversions?

Or is this far enough north and out of the way enough that it would not necessarily contribute to winter air inversion pollution?

I know that generating that much co2 in and of itself is bad. But I'm just trying to confirm if the concern of it adding substantially to inversion air quality is also valid